What I really like about this blower and Whipple, is that how these blowers maintain a steady blow till redline. If you look at the TQ curve, it's almost flat all the way to redline. Image you add a headers and blower Cam on this, the TQ would be solid flat.

The second most important thing (which I don't have an answer to), is which has the least "parasitic losses" which results a better final result. KB has always been famous for that. Whipple is very efficient too. But I don't have the facts among all these new PD blowers.

Thirdly, the throttle body and see how much bigger it is than the stock (even if you port the stock). This has a huge bottleneck on performance, if it's not large enough. In fact the new Mustange GT for 2011, has changed theirs to the shape and size of KB.

What I really like about this blower and Whipple, is that how these blowers maintain a steady blow till redline. If you look at the TQ curve, it's almost flat all the way to redline. Image you add a headers and blower Cam on this, the TQ would be solid flat.

The second most important thing (which I don't have an answer to), is which has the least "parasitic losses" which results a better final result. KB has always been famous for that. Whipple is very efficient too. But I don't have the facts among all these new PD blowers.

Thirdly, the throttle body and see how much bigger it is than the stock (even if you port the stock). This has a huge bottleneck on performance, if it's not large enough. In fact the new Mustange GT for 2011, has changed theirs to the shape and size of KB.

i know its a mustang magazine, but its the blower comparison im interested it, the TVS required 147hp to use where as the Kenne Bell only took 111hp

as for the hood and engine drop, Kenne Bell claims the 2.8 fits with no issue, its when you go for the bigger blowers the hood gets in the way. if it doesnt bother you, an aftermarket larger cowl hood would fix that problem.

i know its a mustang magazine, but its the blower comparison im interested it, the TVS required 147hp to use where as the Kenne Bell only took 111hp

as for the hood and engine drop, Kenne Bell claims the 2.8 fits with no issue, its when you go for the bigger blowers the hood gets in the way. if it doesnt bother you, an aftermarket larger cowl hood would fix that problem.

Thanks for the info Liquid; Ya, KB has always been famous for their efficiency and cool air.

It's amazing how many vendors are building F/I for this car. And we are in the middle recession and high price gas time. Imagine people had more money to spend.

Not to hijack the thread, the new 2011 mustange engine is [technically] awesome too.

[UPDATE]Some info from the magazine:
"While it doesn't compare to the 500 hp required to drive a Top Fuel Roots blower, some of these larger street/strip superchargers required as much as 150 hp to spin them at 18,000 rpm and 20-plus pounds of boost. Not surprisingly, results from the blower dyno correlate perfectly with the chassis dyno. Configured to produce 20 psi of boost (a level not attainable with the TVS on the 5.4), the TVS checked at 18,000 rpm, 340 degrees of discharge temperature, and a whopping 147 hp worth of parasitic drive losses.
This means it took 147 hp to drive the TVS supercharger at this speed and flow level. By comparison, the Kenne Bell required only 12,700 rpm to produce the same 20 psi. Running the same boost level, the discharge temperature registered only 282 degrees, and the Twin Screw blower absorbed only 111 hp in the process. Thus the Twin Screw reduced the inlet charge temp, blower speed, and parasitic losses required to reach the desired boost level."

compression causes heat, which in turn does 2 things: 1. heats up the air which everyone knows colder air results in more power, and 2. the back section of the screws (where the air exits the blower) is the hottest and the screws themselves increase in size, and bang into each other resulting in metal shaving entering the engine

"Just how hot is hot? At crazy high boost 100-degree incoming air becomes 350-degree outlet air-that's a huge heat gain for a twin-screw blower. Jim says he horsebacks a 10-degree gain per pound of boost. Thus, when boost arcs into the 25-pound stratosphere, the hot blower rotors have expanded enough to crash into each other, destroying themselves and sending gritty metal bits downstream into the engine. The rotors always touch first at the gear end (discharge end) of the blower because it is considerably hotter than the inlet end, which you can think of as air-cooled."
-again from the same mustang magazine, http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec...ger/index.html

the last part really isnt an issue unless your running high amounts of boost

i believe theres still the air to water intercooler under the blower with the heat exchanger mounted behind the radiator, and that the liquid cooling uses the water from the heat exchanger. i think its more of an over-kill thing, safety thing for expanding screws, lower the outlet temps before hitting the intercooler so it can get even colder air charge temps

The KB blower looks good and efficient but I believe you will get more power out of a bigger blower. I am not taking anything away from KB but it looks like they were the ones who did the test in the article and not a 3rd party. I think the tests will always be skewed towards a manufacturers product that is doing the test. I can't remember the comparison between the Hennessey 650 car and the 725 Super Snake - didn't they dyno close to the same?? It will be interesting to see these on the new camaros - can't wait.

The KB blower looks good and efficient but I believe you will get more power out of a bigger blower. I am not taking anything away from KB but it looks like they were the ones who did the test in the article and not a 3rd party. I think the tests will always be skewed towards a manufacturers product that is doing the test. I can't remember the comparison between the Hennessey 650 car and the 725 Super Snake - didn't they dyno close to the same?? It will be interesting to see these on the new camaros - can't wait.

Man, what are you doing up in SD at 4:05 AM reading car articles?
Yes, the article was a bit biased, but still KB and Whipple are excellent PD S/C. I wish I could have one of each (Maggie, KN and Whipple)

The KB blower looks good and efficient but I believe you will get more power out of a bigger blower. I am not taking anything away from KB but it looks like they were the ones who did the test in the article and not a 3rd party. I think the tests will always be skewed towards a manufacturers product that is doing the test. I can't remember the comparison between the Hennessey 650 car and the 725 Super Snake - didn't they dyno close to the same?? It will be interesting to see these on the new camaros - can't wait.

The Hennessey and Super Snake were close, but the 650 had ported heads and a blower cam; it's just not the same. If they did testing of both blowers on a 6.2, or whatever, that'd be something I'd be interested in. Also, the 650 had IRS, and big ole' wheels and tires, and such. That Shelby only had a blower upgrade (and maybe intake - I can't remember); the 650 was gone through a lot more...

There's a good write-up on this blower in a recent MM&FF. Yeah - it read like KB was doing the test, not a third party, just as you noticed. The improvements make sense (to my simple mind), but it just seems to me that this article points out facts that just aren't apples-to-apples (like I've read from this company before...). They make a big deal about the 3.6 making A LOT more power with the same size pulley than their 2.8H, but the boost is SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER! Of course it should make more power, right? What am I missing?! Why does this matter? How is it relavent? What if they post numbers at the same boost levels? Will the benefit of this huge blower be a lot less, and maybe expose some inefficiency? I'm sure it's a lot more efficient at higher boost levels, and I think they showed that, but whenever I've ready about the screw compressors and comparisons among them, or to even a TVS, it just seems the comparisons are not under the same circumstances...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z_Rocks

Man, what are you doing up in SD at 4:05 AM reading car articles?
Yes, the article was a bit biased, but still KB and Whipple are excellent PD S/C. I wish I could have one of each (Maggie, KN and Whipple)

I don't want to make it sound like I don't believe this statement, because I do. Going back to my reference above, in another article, by the same magazine, if I remember correctly, they compared a 2.8H (on a GT500) to a 2.3 TVS. There were obvious differences in efficiency, in terms of heat and power consumption, but MM&FF like make it a point to say that they're using the same diameter pulleys in the comparison, but they're spinning the blowers at significantly different boost levels. Shoot - they even test the KB with their Mammoth intake and compare it to the TVS that doesn't even have a similar upgrade (at least that they show in the comparison). I don't care about pulley size as much as testing at the same boost levels. They also go to point out how hot the TVS gets with the same size pulley, but it seems to be out of it's design range compared to the KB; that goes to show the headroom of the KB - no problem there. It's one thing to say we're going to run these blowers, b@lls-out, and see who's king. It's another to TRY to make direct comparisons when they aren't close to being set-up similarly.

The bottom line is I think it's time for someone to see about getting these blowers together, test them under the same conditions, see where they peak, check their efficiency, etc. I work in a lab myself, and so many of these comparisons just don't much sense IMHO. Personally, with what I've read, I think the twin screws have the advantage, but I don't think it's as big as we're being led to believe

i see what your saying about keeping it at equal boost for the test and that they didnt do that, just kept the same size pulley

but when they put them on a different motor to test for efficiency, they had both blowers set to put out 20psi. it may not be the exact results your looking for but you can piece together the puzzle. at equal boost the KB was more efficiency in all aspects, how much better would it be power wise at the same boost would have to left to that specific test. but its not like a KB cost $10K and a magancharger is $1.50, they are not that far off in price (generally speaking)